iPoker Prohibitionists Loudest Voices Heard In Congress

Home » Poker News » iPoker Prohibitionists Loudest Voices Heard In Congress

Wednesday, September 30th, 2015 | Written by Charles Washington

What a difference 5 years make! Back in 2010, it seemed like online gambling might be legalized across the United States due to interest among Washington lawmakers to put an end to the prohibition. Today, there is not even a trace of a whisper about legalizing online gambling at the federal level.

Some might argue that it makes little difference whether or not federal lawmakers support iGaming, as the Office of Legal Counsel has ruled that the Wire Act only applies to sports betting and cannot be amended to include online gambling. Since the states now ultimately have responsibility for passing their own legislation related to legalized online gambling, it may make little difference to some that the voices once speaking out for iGaming have now gone silent. Still, one has to wonder why it’s happened. While one can only speculate, there are a few distinct possibilities.

The Federal iGaming Legalization Movement

Back in 2009, Barney Frank introduced legislation to legalize online gambling in the United States and was able to get 70 cosponsors for the bill. The legislation even made it out of the House Financial Services Committee, something that many bills never manage to do. Peter King, Ron Paul and other prominent lawmakers on both sides of the aisle were very public about their support for the legislation.

Current Status of Federal Movement

Joe Barton seems to be the one voice remaining in the House of Representatives that is continuing to try and move through federal legislation involving online gambling, but his focus has been primarily on online poker. The bill that Barton first penned back in 2011, the ‘Internet Gambling Prohibition, Poker Consumer Protection, and Strengthening UIGEA Act of 2011’, only had 11 cosponsors when it was first written. He has since tried to reintroduce the bill two other times with just one and two cosponsors, respectively. That’s a dramatic reduction from the 70 cosponsors Frank managed to muster.

Why the Change of Heart in Washington?

There are a number of theories regarding why Washington has lost interest in legalizing online gambling at a federal level, including:

– Shift in Focus: Barton is now focusing only on online poker, which has become much less popular over the last 5 years. It’s likely that lawmakers are not getting pushed by constituents to support legislation.

– Poor Performance: Nevada, New Jersey and Delaware have not been able to make a fortune off of online poker the way that supporters of legalization had predicted. Even though liquidity would be vastly different if online gambling was opened up nationwide, many lawmakers may simply feel that it’s not worth the effort to try and legalize it.

– The OLC Ruling: The OLC Ruling has taken away the imperative to force lawmakers to act, leaving many focused on other issues.

– Lobbyist Interventions: Some lawmakers may be getting lobbied by traditional land-based casino operators that want to prevent online poker from becoming competition at the national level.

Therefore, it is unlikely that federal online gambling legislation will become a priority in Washington any time soon; however, it also seems unlikely to become completely banned either. For the foreseeable future, you can expect online poker legalization to be left up to the states, for better and for worse.

RAWA An “Assault on Federalism”

Suffice to say, the Restoration of America’s Wire Act (RAWA), a bill which aims to rid the USA of online gambling, hasn’t gained much support in Congress. That is despite the best efforts of Las Vegas Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson, and his Republican politician allies who have introduced the bill into both the House and the Senate. At the heart of its failing is the fact that many politicians with libertarian views believe RAWA is an affront to the rights of each individual states to manage their own affairs. Last week, a coalition of organizations, headed by the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, then sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee Chairman Representative Bob Goodlatte, stating precisely that point, and describing RAWA as “an outright assault on federalism”.

Previously, Goodlatte had commented that an updates to the Wire Act would have to take into consideration those states that have already adopted online gambling regulation within their borders, or are seeking to do so. The notion was rejected by the coalition behind the letter, though, who stated:

“It has also come to our attention that some in Congress are proposing a ‘gaming moratorium’ which would grandfather existing states that have passed laws while prohibiting other states from exercising their rights under the Tenth Amendment. Make no mistake about it, a moratorium is as much an assault on the Tenth Amendment as an outright ban.”